Text File

Aucbvax.4893 fa.editor-p utzoo!decvax!ucbvax!editor-people Sun Nov 1 22:45:07 1981 small machines >From DLW@MIT-AI Sun Nov 1 22:35:58 1981 I stand by my points.

(1) I don't belive that secondary storage is not a problem. Disks are slow, especially floppy disks. While for local operations (insertion and deletion), you don't need quick access to most of the file, there are other important operations (searches and replaces) for which you do. A search has no right being CPU bound; it takes longer to get a page of a file off of a disk than it does to search through it, in the current state of technology. Judging from the quality of MINCE commands and functionality, I have respect for the compentency of its authors, but its fatal flaw is that it spends too much time disking. Now you may assert that it is just "poorly implemented", but I won't belive it without more evidence. Do you know of any that are not poorly implemented?

(2) I have never seen a micro with a programming environment that I consider half-decent. Your standards may not be the same as mine.

----------------------------------------------------------------- gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> of http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/

This Usenet Oldnews Archive article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:

1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.

2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:

The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996 Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.